alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Figueroa, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (White, J.), rendered April 27,1984, convicting him of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

“The defense of justification * * * permits one to use deadly physical force on another when one reasonably believes that deadly physical force is being used or imminently will be used by such other person” *(see, People v Watts,*57 NY2d 299,301; Penal Law § 35.15 [2] [a]).

*766The record reveals that the complainant was in the process of retreating from defendant when the latter repeatedly struck him with a baseball bat. Even assuming that the complainant approached defendant with the intent to initiate an altercation, there is no indication that complainant was ever armed with a weapon, nor is there any evidence that defendant actually believed that complainant was about to use deadly physical force against him. In fact, each of the defense witnesses testified that they watched as defendant struck the motionless body of complainant. Defendant’s reactions were clearly not those of a man acting in self-defense *(see, People v Collice,*41 NY2d 906, 907). Accordingly, the trial court properly concluded that he resorted to an excessive and unreasonable degree of force under the circumstances. His justification defense was therefore properly rejected. Lazer, J. P., Bracken, O’Connor and Brown, JJ., concur.
---

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of New Jersey Mining
  Company, (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005,
  as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
  "Report"), I, Fred W. Brackebusch, President, Treasurer and Director of New
  Jersey Mining Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements
        of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                       
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   
|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
        in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
        of the Company.

Date: May 14, 2005

By /s/ FRED W. BRACKEBUSCH 
  Fred W. Brackebusch, President, Treasurer, & Director

---
# C_2021088EN.01002801.xml

| 15.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 88/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/28

---

Judgment of the General Court of 27 January 2021 — Olimp Laboratories v EUIPO — OmniVision (Hydrovision)

(Case T-817/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Hydrovision - Earlier EU word mark Hylo-Vision - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 88/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Olimp Laboratories sp. z o.o. (Dębica, Poland) (represented by: M. Kondrat, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: OmniVision GmbH (Puchheim, Germany) (represented by: B. Sorg, D. Wiedemann and M. Ringer, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 September 2019 (Case R 2371/2018 2), relating to opposition proceedings between OmniVision and Olimp Laboratories.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Olimp Laboratories sp z o.o. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Olimp Laboratories sp z o.o. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 27, 27.1.2020.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 38 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.38
                                        Agreed to March 30, 2012        

                      One Hundred Twelfth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
            the third day of January, two thousand and twelve

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That when the Senate recesses or adjourns on any day from Thursday, 
March 29, 2012, through Sunday, April 1, 2012, on a motion offered 
pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his 
designee, it stand recessed or adjourned until 12:00 noon on Monday, 
April 16, 2012, or such other time on that day as may be specified by 
its Majority Leader or his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, 
or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this 
concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when the House 
adjourns on any legislative day through Friday, April 13, 2012, on a 
motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its majority 
leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Monday, 
April 16, 2012, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 
2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2.  The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker of the 
House, or their respective designees, acting jointly after consultation 
with the Minority Leader of the Senate and the Minority Leader of the 
House, shall notify the Members of the Senate and House, respectively, 
to reassemble at such place and time as they may designate if, in their 
opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.
Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as Adopted Pursuant to**

**Section906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

I, Hal M. Krisbergh, thePrincipal Executive Officer of WorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify,pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Qof WorldGate Communications, Inc., for the quarterly period ended March 31,2007, which this certification accompanies, fully complies with requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or78o(d)) and information contained in the March 31, 2007 Form 10-Q fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided toWorldGate and will be retained by WorldGate and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.
| Dated May 10, 2007 |   | /s/ HAL M. KRISBERGH           |
|--------------------|--------|--------------------------------|
|               |   | Hal M. Krisbergh               |
|               |   | Chief Executive  Officer       |
|               |   | (Principal  Executive Officer) |

 

1

----
# C_2020262EN.01003804.xml

| 10.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 262/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/38

---

Order of the General Court of 10 June 2020 — Bujar v Commission

(Case T-708/19) (1)

(2020/C 262/54)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 10, 13.1.2020.

---
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 138 (Thursday, July 22, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 38712]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15589]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural 
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP21-966-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Equitrans' Clean Up Filing--
July 2021 to be effective 8/15/2021.
    Filed Date: 7/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210715-5017.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP21-967-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to a Negotiated Rate 
Agreement Filing--Presidio WAB LLC to be effective 7/15/2021.
    Filed Date: 7/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210715-5053.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP21-968-000.
    Applicants: NEXUS Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates--Release eff 
07-15-2021 to be effective 7/15/2021.
    Filed Date: 7/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210715-5108.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/21.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system 
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying 
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above 
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be 
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the 
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing 
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying 
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 
(toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 16, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-15589 Filed 7-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
1 No. 03-14-00228-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN, TEXAS TROY WILLIAMS § APPELLANT VS. § THE STATE OF TEXAS § APPELLEE

APPEAL FROM THE 147 TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS CAUSE NO. D1-DC-12-904077 STATE'S FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: The State of Texas respectfully moves for an extension of the deadline for filing the State’s brief and, in accordance with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.6 and 10.5(b), advises the Court as follows: (a) Following his conviction for Aggravated Kidnapping, the appellant filed his notice of appeal in the above cause on April 10, 2014. Appellant’s counsel filed a brief on May 28, 2015. ACCEPTED 03-14-00228-CR 5848563 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS 6/26/2015 4:20:52 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK2

(b) The State’s brief is currently due on June 29, 2015
. (c) This request is that the deadline for filing the State’s brief be extended by 30 days
. (d) The number of previous extensions of time granted for submission of the State’s brief is: none . (e) The State relies upon the following facts to reasonably explain the need for an extension of the deadline: 1. During the period since this brief was filed, the attorney assigned to this case has been working on other pressing appellate matters and has not had sufficient time to prepare an adequate response to this brief. 2. This request is not made for the purpose of delay, but to ensure that the Court has a proper State’s brief to aid in the just disposition of the above
cause.3

WHEREFORE, the State of Texas respectfully requests that the deadline for filing the State’s brief be extended to July 29, 2015. Respectfully submitted, ROSEMARY LEHMBERG District Attorney Travis County, Texas

___________________________ Angie Creasy Assistant District Attorney State Bar No. 24043613 P.O. Box 1748 Austin, Texas 78767 (512) 854-9400 Fax No. 854-4810 Angie.Creasy@traviscountytx.gov AppellateTCDA@traviscountytx.gov4 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE AND SERVICE I hereby certify that this motion contains 231 words, based upon the computer program used to generate this motion and excluding words contained in those parts of the motion that Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4(i) exempts from inclusion in the word count, and that this motion is printed in a conventional, 14-point typeface. I further certify that, on the 26 th day of June, 2015, a true and correct copy of this motion was served, by U.S. mail, electronic mail, facsimile, or electronicallythrough the electronic filing manager, to the Appellant’s attorney, Linda IcenhauerRamirez, Attorney at Law, 1103 Nueces, Austin, Texas 78701, [ljir@aol.com].

___________________________ Angie Creasy Assistant District Attorney
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2



                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Town Sports International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Richard Pyle, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. (Section Mark)1350, as adopted pursuant to (Section Mark)906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

                (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

                (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.


/s/ RICHARD PYLE
Town Sports International, Inc.
Chief Financial Officer
March 14, 2003
# C_2020019EN.01005801.xml

| 20.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/58 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/58

---

Order of the General Court of 18 November 2019 — Lantmännen and Lantmännen Agroetanol v Commission

(Case T-79/19) (1)

(2020/C 19/70)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 131, 8.4.2019.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                        5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from financial
statements of Sonics & Materials, Inc. as of and for the 12 months ended June
30, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                    JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                              503,305
<SECURITIES>                                        750,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                     2,370,960
<ALLOWANCES>                                        112,000
<INVENTORY>                                       4,457,841
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  8,211,393
<PP&E>                                            4,409,920
<DEPRECIATION>                                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   14,677,815
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             3,875,731
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                            105,603
<OTHER-SE>                                        6,350,781
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     14,677,815
<SALES>                                          12,080,552
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 12,080,552
<CGS>                                             7,064,259
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     5,404,749
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   (250,973)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  219,416
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (356,899)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         39,570
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (396,469)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (396,469)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          (.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          (.11)
        


</TABLE>
# C_2021471EN.01004301.xml

| 22.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 471/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 471/43

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — Parliament v Axa Assurances Luxembourg and Others

(Case T-384/19) (1)

(Arbitration clause - ‘Construction all-risk’ insurance contract - Extension and renovation of the Konrad Adenauer building in Luxembourg - Damage caused by rainwater - Claim for reimbursement of costs and for payment of the indemnity - Scope of the insurance - Exclusion clause - Ancillary procedural obligations - Procedure by default in part)

(2021/C 471/59)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Paladini and B. Schäfer, acting as Agents, and by C. Point and P. Hédouin, lawyers)

Defendants: Axa Assurances Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg), Bâloise Assurances Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg), La Luxembourgeoise SA (Luxembourg) (represented by: C. Collarini and S. Denu, lawyers), Nationale-Nederlanden Schadeverzekering Maatschappij NV

Re:

Application under Article 272 TFEU seeking an order that the defendants reimburse the costs related to the water damage caused to the Konrad Adenauer building in Luxembourg following heavy rainfall on the site on 27 and 30 May 2016.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

| 1. | Orders Nationale-Nederlanden Schadeverzekering Maatschappij NV to reimburse the sum of EUR 79 653,89 to the European Parliament together with statutory interest for late payment relating thereto as from 22 December 2017, the rate of which is the sum of the interest rate applied by the European Central Bank (ECB) to its main refinancing operations and eight percentage points; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Orders Nationale-Nederlanden Schadeverzekering Maatschappij NV to reimburse the sum of EUR 79 653,89 to the European Parliament together with statutory interest for late payment relating thereto as from 22 December 2017, the rate of which is the sum of the interest rate applied by the European Central Bank (ECB) to its main refinancing operations and eight percentage points;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders Nationale-Nederlanden Schadeverzekering Maatschappij to bear the costs of the default procedure concerning it; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Nationale-Nederlanden Schadeverzekering Maatschappij to bear the costs of the default procedure concerning it;

| 4. | Orders the Parliament, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay two thirds of the costs incurred by Axa Assurances Luxembourg SA, Bâloise Assurances Luxembourg SA and La Luxembourgeoise SA. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders the Parliament, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay two thirds of the costs incurred by Axa Assurances Luxembourg SA, Bâloise Assurances Luxembourg SA and La Luxembourgeoise SA.

---

(1)  OJ C 288, 26.8.2019.

---
##### 



(i)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the Fund, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which the
Report is being prepared;(ii)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the Funds disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in the Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by the Report based on
such evaluation; and(iii)
    
    disclosed in the Report any change in the Funds internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the Funds most recent fiscal quarter that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Funds internal control over
financial reporting; and
  (i)
    
    all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Funds ability
to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Funds
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and(ii)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the Funds internal control over financial reporting.
 By:
    
    /s/ Konrad KoenigswieserKonrad KoenigswieserCorporate Secretary and Vice
PresidentMarch 31, 2006
 60